This is the mail archive of the gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

[Bug fortran/49112] Missing type-bound procedure, "duplicate save" warnings and internal compiler error


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=49112

janus at gcc dot gnu.org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |janus at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #3 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2011-05-22 17:26:49 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #0)
> ...:~$ gfortran -c  test_gfortran_ice.f90 
> test_gfortran_ice.f90:20.41:
> 
>         class(DateTime), intent(IN) :: dt
>                                          1
> Warning: Duplicate SAVE attribute specified at (1)
> test_gfortran_ice.f90:20.41:
> 
>         class(DateTime), intent(IN) :: dt
>                                          1
> Warning: Duplicate SAVE attribute specified at (1)


Here is a reduced test case for the duplicate SAVE attribute:


module datetime_mod

    implicit none
    save

    type :: DateTime
    end type

contains

    character function getString (dt)
        class(DateTime) :: dt
    end function 

end module


At first glance I would save this is invalid, and should be rejected with an
error. In particular, is it allowed to give a lonely SAVE statement? If yes,
what effect should this have? Usually SAVE is specified as an attribute for a
specific variable, right?


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]